Families urge Clay County to review public administrator after allegations of neglect
Loading...
Summary
Multiple public speakers gave detailed allegations that the Clay County public administrator and its contracted providers have at times failed to protect wards and to allow family advocacy; the county auditor cited gaps in documentation and staff committed to follow up.
Several family members, former caregivers and disability advocates pressed the Clay County Commission on alleged failures by the county's public administrator to protect vulnerable adults and to allow meaningful family involvement. The public comment period, which ran for roughly an hour, focused on one family's account of long-term separation, inadequate care and a March 2025 stabbing.
Rita Richards, a special-education teacher who said she maintained a close relationship with a former student identified as "Zach," told commissioners that county guardianship and contractor oversight had "resulted in isolation, loss of voice, and separation from those who care about them most." Richards said that her former student had been moved far from family, had experienced medication and nutrition problems, and that she later learned he "had been stabbed 7 times with a 10-inch kitchen knife" in March 2025. "Zach's survival should not be the end of this story," Richards said as she asked the commission for "a formal review of oversight and accountability and complaint response procedures related to the public administrator's office." (Rita Richards, special-education teacher.)
Other speakers backed Richards' account and called for alternatives to litigation for families who want review and answers. Michelle Anaya, who said she is an advocate for a brother under guardianship, told commissioners the only practical avenue for review has been the court system, which she called financially and emotionally prohibitive. "Transparency, oversight and accountability are essential," Anaya said. (Michelle Anaya, family advocate.) Lakeisha, a day program manager, described how informal supports and long-term relationships can improve outcomes and urged the county to "recognize trusted advocates beyond legal titles." (Lakeisha, day program manager.)
County Auditor Victor Herbert outlined findings from a 2024 performance audit released early 2025 and said some of the public testimony echoed the audit's concerns. Herbert said the audit found inconsistent documentation showing how ward locations were determined and noted that a large share of Clay County wards live outside the county: "roughly two-thirds of the wards" are located away from Clay County, creating obvious visitation and oversight challenges. Herbert said the audit recommended establishing documented procedures to demonstrate that placements are the "best and least restrictive" options and said the public administrator had committed in writing to better document processes. (Victor Herbert, Clay County auditor.)
Commissioners and staff stopped short of immediate formal action on specific cases, noting limits imposed by ongoing probate proceedings and court authority over individual guardianships. County counsel and administrator said staff would follow up: the county attorney said he and the administrator would reach out to the public administrator to gather more information about the concerns and scheduled a meeting to begin that follow-up.
The public testimony led commissioners to request staff follow up with the public administrator's office, to provide an informational package to the commission and to consider whether a policy review, an informal family forum and improved complaint procedures are feasible steps. No binding change to guardianship law or a vote affecting an individual case was taken at the meeting. The commission's next procedural options include a staff-led review, an auditor follow-up and, if warranted, referral to the probate court or other oversight mechanisms.
